ArticleJapanese journal of radiology2025
Effect of spatial resolution on the diagnostic performance of machine-learning radiomics model in lung adenocarcinoma: comparisons between normal- and high-spatial-resolution imaging for predicting invasiveness.
Article in Japanese journal of radiology, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Predicting invasiveness of subsolid nodules: a HRCT-based model for lung adenocarcinoma.American journal of translational research · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
10 authors.
Funding
Abstract
purposeTo construct two machine learning radiomics (MLR) for invasive adenocarcinoma (IVA) prediction using normal-spatial-resolution (NSR) and high-spatial-resolution (HSR) training cohorts, and to validate models (model-NSR and -HSR) in another test cohort while comparing independent radiologists' (R1, R2) performance with and without model-HSR. MATERIALS AND
methodsIn this retrospective multicenter study, all CT images were reconstructed using NSR data (512 matrix, 0.5-mm thickness) and HSR data (2048 matrix, 0.25-mm thickness). Nodules were divided into training (n = 61 non-IVA, n = 165 IVA) and test sets (n = 36 non-IVA, n = 203 IVA). Two MLR models were developed with 18 significant factors for the NSR model and 19 significant factors for the HSR model from 172 radiomics features using random forest. Area under the receiver operator characteristic curves (AUC) was analyzed using DeLong's test in the test set. Accuracy (acc), sensitivity (sen), and specificity (spc) of R1 and R2 with and without model-HSR were compared using McNemar test.
results437 patients (70 ± 9 years, 203 men) had 465 nodules (n = 368, IVA). Model-HSR AUCs were significantly higher than model-NSR in training (0.839 vs. 0.723) and test sets (0.863 vs. 0.718) (p < 0.05). R1's acc (87.2%) and sen (93.1%) with model-HSR were significantly higher than without (77.0% and 79.3%) (p < 0.0001). R2's acc (83.7%) and sen (86.7%) with model-HSR might be equal or higher than without (83.7% and 85.7%, respectively), but not significant (p > 0.50). Spc of R1 (52.8%) and R2 (66.7%) with model-HSR might be lower than without (63.9% and 72.2%, respectively), but not significant (p > 0.21).
conclusionHSR-based MLR model significantly increased IVA diagnostic performance compared to NSR, supporting radiologists without compromising accuracy and sensitivity. However, this benefit came at the cost of reduced specificity, potentially increasing false positives, which may lead to unnecessary examinations or overtreatment in clinical settings.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.